Nomenclature Historically, the name Fusus was used rather indiscriminately for any kind of spindle-shaped shell, for species now placed...

Nomenclature Historically, the name Fusus was used rather indiscriminately for any kind of spindle-shaped shell, for species now placed throughout the families of Buccinoidea and beyond (Muricoidea and even some Conoidea). However, there were several nomenclatural establishments of the name.
1. Fusus Helbling, 1779, has been placed on the Official Index by Opinion 1765 (1994, Bulletin of Zoological Nomenclature 51(2): 159-161), i.e. it cannot be used as a valid name. The type species of Fusus Helbling is Murex intertextus Helbling, 1779, and it belongs in the family Colubrariidae.
2. Fusus Bruguière, 1789, is invalid because it is a junior homonym of Fusus Helbling, 1779, and it has also been placed on the Official Index by Opinion 1765. The type species (by subsequent monotypy) of Fusus Bruguière is Murex colus Linnaeus, 1758, and it belongs in the family Fasciolariidae.
3. It is uncertain whether Röding really intended to establish a new genus or whether he merely used the Fusus of Helbling (unlikely) or Bruguière (probably). Whatever, Fusus Röding, 1798, has also been placed on the Official Index by Opinion 1765.

To summarize, the name Fusus, in whatever taxonomical sense, is now invalid.
Rafinesque (1815) had substituted "Fusus Lamarck" [= Fusus Bruguière] with the name Fusinus. Fusinus then becomes the valid name for the species congeneric with Murex colus Linnaeus, 1759, i.e. Fusinus colus (Linnaeus, 1758). However, many of the species historically placed in Fusus are not congeneric or even confamilial with Fusinus colus.

When databasing names in WoRMS, it is not clear to which of the different Fusus an author originally combined a specific epithet. We have arbitrarily attributed to Fusus Helbling the specific epithets of species now placed in Colubrariidae, and we have attributed to Fusus Bruguière all the others.[details]

Nomenclature Historically, the name Fusus was used rather indiscriminately for any kind of spindle-shaped shell, for species now placed throughout the families of Buccinoidea and beyond (Muricoidea and even some Conoidea). However, there were several nomenclatural establishments of the name.
1. Fusus Helbling, 1779, has been placed on the Official Index by Opinion 1765 (1994, Bulletin of Zoological Nomenclature 51(2): 159-161), i.e. it cannot be used as a valid name. The type species of Fusus Helbling is Murex intertextus Helbling, 1779, and it belongs in the family Colubrariidae.
2. Fusus Bruguière, 1789, is invalid because it is a junior homonym of Fusus Helbling, 1779, and it has also been placed on the Official Index by Opinion 1765. The type species (by subsequent monotypy) of Fusus Bruguière is Murex colus Linnaeus, 1758, and it belongs in the family Fasciolariidae.
3. It is uncertain whether Röding really intended to establish a new genus or whether he merely used the Fusus of Helbling (unlikely) or Bruguière (probably). Whatever, Fusus Röding, 1798, has also been placed on the Official Index by Opinion 1765.

To summarize, the name Fusus, in whatever taxonomical sense, is now invalid.
Rafinesque (1815) had substituted "Fusus Lamarck" [= Fusus Bruguière] with the name Fusinus. Fusinus then becomes the valid name for the species congeneric with Murex colus Linnaeus, 1759, i.e. Fusinus colus (Linnaeus, 1758). However, many of the species historically placed in Fusus are not congeneric or even confamilial with Fusinus colus.

When databasing names in WoRMS, it is not clear to which of the different Fusus an author originally combined a specific epithet. We have arbitrarily attributed to Fusus Helbling the specific epithets of species now placed in Colubrariidae, and we have attributed to Fusus Bruguière all the others.[details]